The Hawaiian gazette., 1887-11-29

HIwA, j. X. KAUNAMANo, AND
THE HoNoKAA SUGAR COMPANY.
BIcKERToN J. j., {FoRNANDER J. ABsENT.)
Opinion of the Court per JUDD CO..
This is a bill in equity alleging
that in the year 1858, one Olepau
together with Kaiaokioki and Papa
ike bought of the Government a
tract of land in Papaanui, Hamakua,
Hawaii, containg 225 acres for 1925,
and there was issued to them there
for Royal Patent numbered 2465;
that of the purchase money Olepau
paid S175, Kaiaokioki $50, and Pa
paike $50, and that this money was
paid to Rev. L. Lyons deceased, the
Government Land, Agent for the
land ; that at first this land was sur
veyed off for Olepau alone, but as it
contained more acres than was
proper Ito grant TO one person., Mr..
Lyons ordered that some other
names be inserted Gn the PATENT,
and for this reason the names of
Kaiaokioli and Papaike were in
serted, but they then paid the above
mentioned sums, and at that time
Olepau, Kaiaokioki and Papaike
believed that they were owners of
the land in proportion to the
amounts of money paid by each one
respectively, to wit, Olepau 175
acres, Kaiaokioki 20 acres, and Pa
paike 80 acres: that Aulike (plain-
tiff, has bought the interest of Pa
paike in this land and claims 80
acres: that the plaintiffs are in
formed and believe that Kaiaokioki
IS dead, and that Rah apa, Lono-
hiwa and J. X. Kaunamano defend
ants, claim to hold his interest in
this land; but what their respective
shares are these plaintiffs are igno-
rant, but they defendants allege
that they are entitled to an un-
divided one-third part of this land
to wit: 20 acres, but that they are
in fact only entitled to twenty acres:
that the plaintiffs are informed and
believe that Rahapa and Lonohiwa
have leased to the Honokaa Sugar
Co., seventy acres, undivided, of
this land, on terms unknown to the
plaintiffs: that the defendants we'll
knew the above stated facts or had
good reasons to put themselves upon
enquiry of them: that plaintiffs are
DESTROYS of partitioning the land
among those entitled to it accord
ing to their true interests in the
same as above set forth and have
asked the defendants to so divide it,
but they have declined this reason
able request, and the plaintiffs have
no other remedy but as now asked |
of this Court.
The bill prays for an answer from |
the defendants, for a decree of par
tition of the land in accordance with |
the respective interests of the par
ties, that the lease of Rahapa and |
L0nohiwa to the Honokaa Sugar |
Co., be declared void as to any ex-
,ess of land over the proper share
IF the lessons, and for general relief.
The answer of Rahapa and hus-
band, and Lonohiwa and the Homo
1aa Sugar Co., denies the payment
If the purchase money in the pro-
portions as alleged, and AYERS that
0lepau, Kaiaokioki and Papaike
contributed equally to the payment
If the purchase money and that said
1atentees were tenants in common
md each entitled to one undivided
bird part of the land, and that they
with j. X. Kaunamano are entitled
o one undivided third of. the land.
to the rights of the said
Iaiaokioki.
The Court heard the testimony
offered by the plaintiffs and after
rgument held that a resulting trust
vas not established and ordered a
PARTITION of the land in the proper
ion Of one-third to each of the three
parties holding the title of the orr
final patentees.
The plaintiffs appealed and now
lain that the evidence shows that
)lepau paid S175, Kaiaokioki $50,
md Papaike $50, of the purchase
money and therefore the trust in
uch legal estate will result to the
PARTIES who have advanced the pur-
hase money in proportion to the
mount of their respective advances. /
By THE CoURT.-The general
ule of law is well settled that
where upon purchase of property,
ne conveyance of the legal title is
AIKEN in the name of one person.
While the consideration is given or
'aid by another, the parties being
strangers to each other, a resulting
rust Immediately arises from the
transaction, and the person named
n the conveyance will be a trustee
or tha Marty from WHOM, H. -.